CAP Rangers

[mikeylikey]

^ Understood......I retract my ARGH.  Sorry!   :angel:

[lordmonar]

John,

I like it....but why not the officers?

As you said....cadet like the beret....so do officers.

[davidsinn]

John,

I like it....but why not the officers?

As you said....cadet like the beret....so do officers.

In INWG all GTM's are allowed to wear one. I love mine.

[LittleIronPilot]

I will say I never understood the dislike for beret's.

I earned mine and was proud to wear it (Airborne).

BTW...my resume does not compare to some here (SF, PJ, etc). However I will say that in the 82nd the FIRST thing you did was shave and shape your beret...no way in hell it stayed unshaved, and we certainly were not REMF's or "garrison pukes".

[JohnKachenmeister]

OK, Officers too.

I swear... you guys are gonna have to start respecting my decisions when I get to be National Commander!  No more talking sense to me!

[BillB]

John

You going to move National Headquarters to Patrick?

[Stonewall]

I will say I never understood the dislike for beret's.

I earned mine and was proud to wear it (Airborne).

You'll notice that I'm very anti-beret in CAP, but not anti-beret overall.  And to be honest, I'm not against berets in CAP, however, I am against them being awarded for finishing a school versus being a part of a specialized group.

Meaning, graduation from Hawk should not mean wearing a beret.

But, if you attended a specialized course such as Hawk, earning a recognized qualification that not everyone can achieve (some sort of attrition), and then were assigned to a recognized and official specialized group/team that offered something more than just being a standard issue ground team, then, I think it would be okay.

As another example.  I forget where or whom, but there was some special team called the "ramp rats", that were some high speed, highly trained, flight line team that only did flight line operations.  Put together a flight of those guys with some achievable qualifications and a course and make them a solid unit, throw'em a beret.

I am not for individuals going to an activity and coming back with a beret for completion.  A skill badge, even a tab, yes.  But not a hat.

You don't get a maroon beret for completing airborne school; a tan beret for completing ranger school.  Those are skills and do not mean you are going to an airborne or ranger unit.  Graduate the PJ pipeline and become a pararsecueman and you get to wear a maroon beret, but only while in that career field.  Same thing with Army special forces.  Sure, you get a green beret at the end of the Q-course, but it's not because of your qualification, it's because of your assigned unit.  People don't go to the SF Q-course and then go back to their unit, they graduate and are assigned to a Special Forces Group.

That's my rationale for my dislike for the use of berets in CAP; it doesn't follow the same rule of thumb that the "real military" follows.

Do berets look cool?  Yep.  Can people really mess'em up?  You know it.  I guess I just want and expect people to do things such as advanced training for more reasons than to get a cool looking hat.  Call me crazy.

[LittleIronPilot]

I will say I never understood the dislike for beret's.

I earned mine and was proud to wear it (Airborne).

You'll notice that I'm very anti-beret in CAP, but not anti-beret overall.  And to be honest, I'm not against berets in CAP, however, I am against them being awarded for finishing a school versus being a part of a specialized group.

Meaning, graduation from Hawk should not mean wearing a beret.

But, if you attended a specialized course such as Hawk, earning a recognized qualification that not everyone can achieve (some sort of attrition), and then were assigned to a recognized and official specialized group/team that offered something more than just being a standard issue ground team, then, I think it would be okay.

As another example.  I forget where or whom, but there was some special team called the "ramp rats", that were some high speed, highly trained, flight line team that only did flight line operations.  Put together a flight of those guys with some achievable qualifications and a course and make them a solid unit, throw'em a beret.

I am not for individuals going to an activity and coming back with a beret for completion.  A skill badge, even a tab, yes.  But not a hat.

You don't get a maroon beret for completing airborne school; a tan beret for completing ranger school.  Those are skills and do not mean you are going to an airborne or ranger unit.  Graduate the PJ pipeline and become a pararsecueman and you get to wear a maroon beret, but only while in that career field.  Same thing with Army special forces.  Sure, you get a green beret at the end of the Q-course, but it's not because of your qualification, it's because of your assigned unit.  People don't go to the SF Q-course and then go back to their unit, they graduate and are assigned to a Special Forces Group.

That's my rationale for my dislike for the use of berets in CAP; it doesn't follow the same rule of thumb that the "real military" follows.

Do berets look cool?  Yep.  Can people really mess'em up?  You know it.  I guess I just want and expect people to do things such as advanced training for more reasons than to get a cool looking hat.  Call me crazy.

LOL...actually I agree with what you said ONE HUNDRED PERCENT!

BTW...I know a former ground pounder her in GA Wing is trying to get together small team elements from across the state to be "rapid response" GTM's. I am looking into it and hope to become a part of it....of course there are no special badges, ribbons, or berets and that is fine with me. What I DO want as recognition is to be UTILIZED!

[lordmonar]

I too agree with what Stonwall said.

I allow my one NBB cadet to wear his....because I want to allow all GT members to wear one as well.

I also stress....that no matter what National does about this.....unit commanders have final say about whether to allow berets or not.

Unit cohesion is very important and nothing national does should prevent a unit commander from telling a HMRS or NBB grad to take off the extra bling and wear the unit's head gear.

But....on that same token....if one unit commander says this is what we are doing here then we as officers should support that (assuming that it is within regs) commander.

I don't like all the ranger bling....it's just too much.  But some is good.  Let's not throw out the baby with the bath water.

[Stonewall]

I too agree with what Stonwall said.

You sure, Patrick?  Because everything you wrote after the first sentence was the opposite of what I said.

I am against one individual at a squadron wearing something different.  Again, I'm a fan of a flight of specialists, not one here and there standing out in the crowd.

I really really miss the cadets of yore.  Graduates of PJOC, APJOC, NGSAR, ANGSAR as well as a lot of local and regional training.  Earn your GTM skill badge, come back, do the job.  Conduct ancillary and advanced skills training outside of the required "check offs", gain knowledge, and just continue doing your job; without so much as a special shoulder cord to wear.

I think doing something for the sake of training, learning and gaining new experiences teaches humility, whereas doing things for the sake of awards, recognition and showing off is an elitist attitude.

[JohnKachenmeister]

John

You going to move National Headquarters to Patrick?

No.  The Officers' Club burned down.  We'll have to stay somewhere civilized.

[mikeylikey]

John

You going to move National Headquarters to Patrick?

No.  The Officers' Club burned down.  We'll have to stay somewhere civilized.

You make light of a very serious situation.  I was once stationed at a post where the Club did burn down, and after that the moral of all the officers was almost non existant. 

[afgeo4]

There is a point top making graduates of elite programs stand out, which is to motivate others to attend said programs. However, the real Army gets that done with a simple little tab. Not a big ole clown suit like you describe.

There's also a point to elite programs that make people feel special. They take a committed group & push them through a lot more training than the average person. It's not that the average person can't come & get that training, but this group has committed to being there consistently & working hard. The rest is esprit.

Now there's also a point I've encountered where cadets come back from such places with an elitist attitude & think they are above the law. That is unacceptable & should be broken on first encounter. They aren't remotely special, they merely have an experience which they are now supposed to share with everyone.

IMO YMMV

Elite programs in the Army aren't created to get others to join the programs. They exist for operational training purposes. That's why a simple tab or badge is enough.

That's not so when it comes to Hawk Mtn. They exist to attract more cadets and seniors next year so they get more money and fame (and power within PAWG, NER, and CAP as a whole). That's why all the bling and the need to attract and stand out.

Now... given a real world ground CAP mission, which do you think trains you better, GSAR or Hawk Mtn? I know grads from both and while they all have the same ground team qualifications, I don't see attitude issues from NGSAR grads. That will win me over any day.

I don't even think there is a need for Hawk Mountain at all. I understand it if NGSAR didn't exist, but since it does... I think so much better can be done with the money, land, equipment, and people.

[cap235629]

....authorize the NASAR SARTECH patches.

ummm..they are table 6-4 #25.....
block 1 NASAR qualification patches
block 2 embroidered
block 3 on the right sleeve 1/2 inch below shoulder seam of BDU or field uniform shirt, BDU field jacket, utility uniform or flight suit.

Back before the NB decision 2006 there was discussion of re-designing a HMRS patch for wear in accordance with the regulation that had rockers that were placed above the patch indicating the Ranger Rating (like NASAR) with Staff or Medic underneath.....when TP said tabs are ok the re-design went out the window

mk

They are no longer allowed to be worn in this location on th BDU/BBDU/ Field Jacket as the reverse American flag is worn in this position.  They can be worn on the left breast pocket just like any other patch previously authorized to be worn on the right sleeve

[JohnKachenmeister]

John

You going to move National Headquarters to Patrick?

No.  The Officers' Club burned down.  We'll have to stay somewhere civilized.

You make light of a very serious situation.  I was once stationed at a post where the Club did burn down, and after that the moral of all the officers was almost non existant. 

Make light of it!  I have to LIVE here!  It isn't bad enough that I live in a shack out in an alligator-infested swamp with a lazy dog and a crabby old woman, but I'm also stuck out here without a decent officers' club!

Even in Vietnam, and Honduras, we had a club.

I blame this situation on Space Command.  Since they are mostly non-pilots, their priorities and ability to process logic are both very faulty.

[flyerthom]

No.  The Officers' Club burned down.  We'll have to stay somewhere civilized.


Make light of it!  I have to LIVE here!  It isn't bad enough that I live in a shack out in an alligator-infested swamp with a lazy dog and a crabby old woman, but I'm also stuck out here without a decent officers' club!

Even in Vietnam, and Honduras, we had a club.

I blame this situation on Space Command.  Since they are mostly non-pilots, their priorities and ability to process logic are both very faulty.

If there was a club the dog wouldn't be so lazy ...

[arajca]

I have stayed OUT of the Ranger/Hawk Mountain/Berets/Bling/etc. discussion because I really am not interested in trying to look like a Frenchman.  But...

My head is starting to hurt with all the NIMS/SARTECH/MEDIC requirements vs. CAP Rangers.  I want a solution that will make the folks happy, not make us look like idiots, and is simple and fair in its application.

So:

1.  What WE as CAP guys do is unique.  We operate ground teams to aid in searches conducted by aircraft.  They are trained in coordinated searches with an aircraft, communication (with and without radio) with a search aircraft.  Our GT guys are trained in basic fieldcraft, and rely on external support for their operations.  They can be tactically employed in two ways:

     a.  As separate teams, consisteng of CAP members only, and operating with a CAP airplane.

     b.  As a liaison element with another agency's SAR ground team, to provide coordination with a CAP airplane (Not at all unlike the Air Boss in an infantry unit who is an Air Force officer and pilot who coordinates the air support).

2.  The Air Force, in its own AFI, identifies these CAP ground-pounding people as "Rangers."  We limit that term to HM grads, and guys who complete a HM curriculum in Florida and elsewhere, but the AF does not.

3.  The cadets like berets.  We can't get around that.  Officers look pretentions in them, but the cadets love them.

So...  Proposed solution for discussion:

1.  GTM-3 requirements will be unchanged, and upon qualification as a GTM-3 , the GT badge will be awarded.

2.  GTM-2 requirements will be enhanced to include a minimum 3-day (2-nights) training bivouac in the field.  The training should fill the three days, be challenging, and mission-related.  At the conclusion of GTM-2 a beret will be awarded to cadets, but without a beret flash.

Will some form of standardized guide be provided for these activities or will each one wing it? WIth the very general guidance listed here, you never know what you'll end up with. The problem with three full days is, except for summer,  cadets can't do Friday or Monday, and many seinors can't do Fri/Mon year round.

3.  GTM-1 completion gets the cadet a generic beret flash.  Maybe just a modified wing-and-prop cadet cap insignia.

How about the old National Emergency Assistance Training patch, minus the arc? It's about the right size. See CAPM 39-1, pg 125, for picture. Or, if having the word "Ranger" is important, replace the stars with "RANGER". Using something not specifically cadet related is good if senior member wear the beret as well - see comment below. What about grade on the beret? You know that issue will come up.

4.  NBB and Hawk grads go directly to the beret, but with a distinctive flash, one for NBB and a different one for HM.

5.  GTM-3 and GTM-2 will be designated "Ranger Trainees" and GTM-1's, NBB grads, and HM grads will be designated "Rangers."

Do HM and NBB meet the GTM1 requirements? If not, why should they be called "Ranger" if that title is for GTM1's?

6.  Officers get the GT badges, but should not wear the beret unless they are instructing at NBB/HM, and once the class ends they put the BDU patrol cap on.

If the beret is the only thing identifying Rangers, why not let officer wear them?

7.  NO OTHER BLING.  No patches, belts, bibs, whistles, sabers, sidearms, pins, funny hats, nothing!

Flame away.

[Gunner C]

John

Even in Vietnam, and Honduras, we had a club.

Ah yes.  The club at Soto Cano.  I left some of my best brain cells there. 

[JohnKachenmeister]

John

Even in Vietnam, and Honduras, we had a club.

Ah yes.  The club at Soto Cano.  I left some of my best brain cells there. 

Sergeant, I'm going to a meeting in Palmerola.  I'll be under my usual table if you need me!

[JohnKachenmeister]

I have stayed OUT of the Ranger/Hawk Mountain/Berets/Bling/etc. discussion because I really am not interested in trying to look like a Frenchman.  But...

My head is starting to hurt with all the NIMS/SARTECH/MEDIC requirements vs. CAP Rangers.  I want a solution that will make the folks happy, not make us look like idiots, and is simple and fair in its application.

So:

1.  What WE as CAP guys do is unique.  We operate ground teams to aid in searches conducted by aircraft.  They are trained in coordinated searches with an aircraft, communication (with and without radio) with a search aircraft.  Our GT guys are trained in basic fieldcraft, and rely on external support for their operations.  They can be tactically employed in two ways:

     a.  As separate teams, consisteng of CAP members only, and operating with a CAP airplane.

     b.  As a liaison element with another agency's SAR ground team, to provide coordination with a CAP airplane (Not at all unlike the Air Boss in an infantry unit who is an Air Force officer and pilot who coordinates the air support).

2.  The Air Force, in its own AFI, identifies these CAP ground-pounding people as "Rangers."  We limit that term to HM grads, and guys who complete a HM curriculum in Florida and elsewhere, but the AF does not.

3.  The cadets like berets.  We can't get around that.  Officers look pretentions in them, but the cadets love them.

So...  Proposed solution for discussion:

1.  GTM-3 requirements will be unchanged, and upon qualification as a GTM-3 , the GT badge will be awarded.

2.  GTM-2 requirements will be enhanced to include a minimum 3-day (2-nights) training bivouac in the field.  The training should fill the three days, be challenging, and mission-related.  At the conclusion of GTM-2 a beret will be awarded to cadets, but without a beret flash.

Will some form of standardized guide be provided for these activities or will each one wing it? WIth the very general guidance listed here, you never know what you'll end up with. The problem with three full days is, except for summer,  cadets can't do Friday or Monday, and many seinors can't do Fri/Mon year round.

3.  GTM-1 completion gets the cadet a generic beret flash.  Maybe just a modified wing-and-prop cadet cap insignia.

How about the old National Emergency Assistance Training patch, minus the arc? It's about the right size. See CAPM 39-1, pg 125, for picture. Or, if having the word "Ranger" is important, replace the stars with "RANGER". Using something not specifically cadet related is good if senior member wear the beret as well - see comment below. What about grade on the beret? You know that issue will come up.

4.  NBB and Hawk grads go directly to the beret, but with a distinctive flash, one for NBB and a different one for HM.

5.  GTM-3 and GTM-2 will be designated "Ranger Trainees" and GTM-1's, NBB grads, and HM grads will be designated "Rangers."

Do HM and NBB meet the GTM1 requirements? If not, why should they be called "Ranger" if that title is for GTM1's?

6.  Officers get the GT badges, but should not wear the beret unless they are instructing at NBB/HM, and once the class ends they put the BDU patrol cap on.

If the beret is the only thing identifying Rangers, why not let officer wear them?

7.  NO OTHER BLING.  No patches, belts, bibs, whistles, sabers, sidearms, pins, funny hats, nothing!

Flame away.

OK, I had a skeleton of an idea.  If you want to flesh it out, fine.

First.  Yes.  The GTM-2 bivouac should have specific training goals, established Nationally.  How these goals are met is the local commander's job.  I have no problem with a Friday afternoon through Sunday afternoon bivouac meeting the standard.  In the Army we called them MUTA-5 weekends (Men Under Tent Asleep?)

I did not look up the ES patch you described, but I'm sure it would be fine.  I have no problem with embroidered officer grade on the flash for both cadet and adult officers.  We would just have to establish background colors for the different flashes.  As a future National Commander, I delegate such details to my future staff.  There is no pressing need to identify the word "Ranger" anywhere.  The badge and beret will identfy Ranger Trainees, the beret flash will identify qualified Rangers.  Identification is symbolic.  If you don't know the symbol for a CAP Ranger, you have no need to know who is one!

The last time I checked the curriculum at both HM and NBB, they DID meet the minimum standards for GTM-1.  If this has changed, as the future National Commander I order it changed back.

Somebody else already convinced me to allow officers to wear the Monica Lewinsky Hat.